ah, there's the internal balance

oh well, back to your regularly scheduled gushing over rhymer

On the topic of rerolls and crit-fishing, I'm just going to leave this here.

You can post it,

It does not change the fact that you have a 25% chance of gaining a crit/hit, and a 25% chance of getting a blank.

We aren't talking about aggregate damage, but the odds of getting that hit/crit. Sure if you have a blank, you have a 75% chance of getting 1/2 damage to getting another blank (25% chance) so your odds of increasing damage go up significantly. However you have a hit, or a blank, you have the same odds of that blank coming back up, or a 50% chance of getting 1 damage and no crit, in effect a 75% chance of not getting a hit/crit, and that 75% chance remains the same on every dice you roll.

Yes rolling the dice more times, means more chances of getting a hit/crit, but the odds are the same on the 5th dice roll, as the first, 25%/25%50%.

The math works out. As you stack rerolls, the hits+crits "stick" and the pool of blanks and regular hits decreases in size. You get increasingly diminishing returns after the 2nd reroll, though, and depending on specific circumstances you may wish to simply keep a hit rather than fish for a hit+crit depending on the circumstances.

The math works out. As you stack rerolls, the hits+crits "stick" and the pool of blanks and regular hits decreases in size. You get increasingly diminishing returns after the 2nd reroll, though, and depending on specific circumstances you may wish to simply keep a hit rather than fish for a hit+crit depending on the circumstances.

The % chance stays the same, this is immutable, the probability increases or decreases, but the actual chance is the same on every dice you roll.

And it was a discussion about crit fishing, which means having either a blank, or a hit, which means you have a 75% chance of getting a blank or a hit, and a 25% chance of a hit/crit.

Why would you crits fish unless you needed the double hit side to finish something off?

Way I see it, bomber command is just a rely potent guarantee to deter those really devastating blanks that come up all too often and Rhymer is THE safest way to use the upgrade without exposing the flotillas

The question now is "bombers or sprays?"

On the topic of rerolls and crit-fishing, I'm just going to leave this here.

You can post it,

It does not change the fact that you have a 25% chance of gaining a crit/hit, and a 25% chance of getting a blank.

We aren't talking about aggregate damage, but the odds of getting that hit/crit. Sure if you have a blank, you have a 75% chance of getting 1/2 damage to getting another blank (25% chance) so your odds of increasing damage go up significantly. However you have a hit, or a blank, you have the same odds of that blank coming back up, or a 50% chance of getting 1 damage and no crit, in effect a 75% chance of not getting a hit/crit, and that 75% chance remains the same on every dice you roll.

Yes rolling the dice more times, means more chances of getting a hit/crit, but the odds are the same on the 5th dice roll, as the first, 25%/25%50%.

I can post it, and be accurate, because I understand probability.

You can nay say it just like you do every other probability post, because you don't. I'm not going to explain basic probability to you again in this thread.

Show where my work is wrong or gtfo. Spoiler: you can't, because I'm right.

Why would you crits fish unless you needed the double hit side to finish something off?

Way I see it, bomber command is just a rely potent guarantee to deter those really devastating blanks that come up all too often and Rhymer is THE safest way to use the upgrade without exposing the flotillas

The question now is "bombers or sprays?"

If Bomber Command Centers stack (currently the evidence points to "they do", but an FAQ would be welcome) then if you're using 2+ BCCs you can go crit fishing. If this seems reckless, you can always crit fish with the first reroll and then use the second only if the first reroll came up blank. As I recall, the average damage came out the same by going aggro first reroll then conservative second reroll (as opposed to aggro for both). The aggro+conservative style is more consistent in terms of getting a damage result but it produces less crits. That may or may not matter.

Everybody stay frosty! The data doesn't lie... let's get back to talking about rerolls!

I don't think BCC stacks because it's an effect by the same card (granted these are separate instances of the same card).

Ard and Snipa are looking at the logic of multiple bomber attacks

Eastern is looking at single dice rolls

You are arguing different things.

Everybody stay frosty! The data doesn't lie... let's get back to talking about rerolls!

I don't think BCC stacks because it's an effect by the same card (granted these are separate instances of the same card).

There's nothing in the rules that prohibits several BCCs from stacking. You'd choose the order of their resolution. The thing that seems to be confusing is that never before in the game has the same named card been able to affect anything more than once so it "feels" wrong. Again, I'm hoping for an FAQ so everyone's on the same page with this one.

Ard and Snipa are looking at the logic of multiple bomber attacks

Eastern is looking at single dice rolls

You are arguing different things.

You do still trend towards higher damage per attack when crit-fishing across multiple rerolls. With a single reroll (which will be the case with most bomber attacks, unless piling on expensive Bomber Command Centers suddenly becomes a thing), it's really up to you how you want to reroll. With a single reroll I know I would be more conservative with it.

I've found the most consistent way to do it with multiple rerolls is crit fish all the way up into the penultimate reroll and then only reroll blanks with the final reroll. If you're more reckless, you can keep crit-fishing all the way through but it tends to produce more swingy results. Given bombers specifically do damage in tiny little chunks that are difficult to use defense tokens well against, I would prioritize more reliable damage over more explosive damage.

What I want to know is why does nobody like looking at standard deviations and confidence levels.

Averages arent that useful on their own.

What I want to know is why does nobody like looking at standard deviations and confidence levels.

Averages arent that useful on their own.

Because it's easier to show data with just the averages than get into greater detail. And I already get enough pushback without getting into grittier nuts and bolts.

Also, flat averages tend to be more broadly applicable, where confidence tends to be of the form "likelihood to reach a certain target value," which is more scenario-driven. So, I do it during games to determine courses of action, but it tends to be less useful for generalized discussions like "should I generally reroll hits, or blanks only?"

What I want to know is why does nobody like looking at standard deviations and confidence levels.

Averages arent that useful on their own.

I think Eastern King is assuming the Gambler's fallacy for Ard, but Ard is clearly pointing to aggregate, multiple instance data and so such an error, as Snipa and Ard are saying, ought not apply.

Of course I have a higher chance of getting crit/hit if I can reroll 3 times (57.8% chance vs 25% for the curious)! But if I'm on the third reroll, however, and have already failed twice, I have no better a chance of getting a hit/crit than when I first rolled (25% vs 25%). These are absolutely compatible concepts, but I see A LOT of players getting tripped up by that concept. And then you add in insults and ego, and then we can't get anywhere.

TLDR: stay in school, kids!

TLDR: stay in school, kids!

What I want to know is why does nobody like looking at standard deviations and confidence levels.

Averages arent that useful on their own.

If you'd love to post some 90% confidence intervals on a particular issue of relevance to the community, I'd be quite happy to read it.

I see averages as a conversation starter. It gives me a good baseline of what a ship's damage will be. They are also useful for evaluating whether a ship performed poorly because it was an outlier, or because I did something intrinsically wrong with the build.

The situation in-game definitely affects whether the decision to reroll is prudent or not. That doesn't go away.

On the topic of rerolls and crit-fishing, I'm just going to leave this here.

You can post it,

It does not change the fact that you have a 25% chance of gaining a crit/hit, and a 25% chance of getting a blank.

We aren't talking about aggregate damage, but the odds of getting that hit/crit. Sure if you have a blank, you have a 75% chance of getting 1/2 damage to getting another blank (25% chance) so your odds of increasing damage go up significantly. However you have a hit, or a blank, you have the same odds of that blank coming back up, or a 50% chance of getting 1 damage and no crit, in effect a 75% chance of not getting a hit/crit, and that 75% chance remains the same on every dice you roll.

Yes rolling the dice more times, means more chances of getting a hit/crit, but the odds are the same on the 5th dice roll, as the first, 25%/25%50%.

I can post it, and be accurate, because I understand probability.

You can nay say it just like you do every other probability post, because you don't. I'm not going to explain basic probability to you again in this thread.

Show where my work is wrong or gtfo. Spoiler: you can't, because I'm right.

Sorry should have read the rest of the replies, before responding.

Everything has been said, that needs saying.